GNU bug report logs - #45068
[PATCH] 28.0.50; Update Modus themes 1.0.2 (backward-incompatible)

Previous Next

Full log

Message #32 received at 45068 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: contovob <at> tcd.ie, info <at> protesilaos.com, 45068 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 juri <at> linkov.net
Subject: Re: bug#45068: [PATCH] 28.0.50;
 Update Modus themes 1.0.2 (backward-incompatible)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 08:16:47 -0600

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Taking a step back, why are any themes in "etc/themes" to begin with?
>
> This question should have been asked 10 years ago, when we added that
> place.

I wasn't paying attention 10 years ago, I'm afraid.  :-)

> Nowadays I think the question is what's so wrong with that
> place that would justify moving the files.  If there are no serious
> problems, I'd prefer to keep using that directory for themes.

Right.  Well, I don't exactly have a strong opinion either way.  But I
do think that we should be consistent: it would be confusing to have
some themes in "etc/themes" and some in "lisp/themes".

If we can't move all themes to "lisp/themes" and we don't want to use
"lisp/themes" just for support files, to my mind the only remaining way
forward is to add some way to byte-compile (perhaps only some?) files in
"etc/themes".  And then make sure they can be loaded, are installed with
Emacs, etc.

Does that sound good, or could we do even better here?

Protesilaos, what do you think?  Does it sound workable for you?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.